J.S. Balharrie v. Water Administration Ministerial Corporation [1989] NSWLEC 163

Land and Environment Court of New South Wales

CITATION : J.S. Balharrie v. Water Administration Ministerial Corporation [1989] NSWLEC 163 APPLICANT J.S. Balharrie

PARTIES : FIRST RESPONDENT Water Administration Ministerial Corporation

SECOND RESPONDENT P. Fowler FILE NUMBER(S) : 30329 of 1987 CORAM: Hemmings J KEY ISSUES: :- LEGISLATION CITED: Water Act 1912. Land and Environment Court Act CASES CITED: DATES OF HEARING: DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/27/1989

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

JUDGMENT:

HIS HONOUR: The Local Land Board, upon a reference from the Department of Water Resources (now the Water Administration Ministerial Corporation, "the Corporation"), conducted a public enquiry as to the desirability of granting an application for a licence pursuant to s.13A of the Water Act 1912.

J.S. Balharrie is the owner of Portion 161, Parish of Maroota, County of Cumberland, and made application to pump water from the Hawkesbury River for the purpose of irrigation thereon. The application involves the use of an existing pipeline from a pump located on land Portions 15, 101 and 109 owned by Mr P. Fowler adjacent to the Hawkesbury River. The said works were installed pursuant to an earlier licence which has expired and which is the subject of an application for renewal pursuant to s.14 of the Act. That application is subject to appeal to this Court and has not yet been heard.

Mr Fowler is an objector to the subject application and made submissions and called evidence at the hearing before the Land Board.

On 17th June, 1987 the Land Board found that it was satisfied that the requirements of s.13A(5)(b) and (c) had been satisfied, but that there was a high probability that it would be reasonably practicable to provide a dam site on Mr Balharrie's land for the purpose of a water supply which, when supplemented by a possible bore supply, could provide water adequate for the purpose of the application. For that reason, it reported that in its opinion the granting of the application is undesirable. The applicant appeals to this Court against such recommendation.